On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Ok, the patch is valid, no arguments. That said.. It's not like it's critical. So can you please re-send after 2.6.14 to remind me? Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- i386 spinlock fairness: bizarre test results
- From: Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]>
- Re: i386 spinlock fairness: bizarre test results
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: i386 spinlock fairness: bizarre test results
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
- From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
- From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- i386 spinlock fairness: bizarre test results
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
- Next by Date: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [BUG/PATCH/RFC] Oops while completing async USB via usbdevio
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits
- Index(es):
 |